The War on Religion in the US - Page 2




 
--
Boots
 
January 15th, 2005  
03USMC
 
 
Our Court does not use a Bible nor do persons sworn state "So help me God". Anymore.

" Do You. Swear or Affirm that all evidence you give in this cause is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."


Most States have removed references to God due to Cases Won in certain jurisdictions by the ACLU. Like the 9th Federal Circus errrr Circuit Court. Whether they were part of a judgement or not.
January 15th, 2005  
Charge 7
 
 
Didn't know that 03USMC. Knowing your background, I'm sure you're right on top of that he he. Thanks for the info. What do you think btw? Affirming seems less demanding than swearing on the flag or your particular religious book to me. Taking it all away seems to be a loosening of it all in my opinion.
January 15th, 2005  
Duty Honor Country
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charge_7
Two) Seperation of church and state is provided for in our Constitution. At what line is that drawn is the crux of the current contention about it all that's now going on. Many feel that there should be absolutely not the faintest hint of religion in our government while many more think that it gets to the point of ridiculousness what some people feel is an infringment of the church on the state. Where do we draw the line? As somebody pointed out in another thread, why am I not allowed to mention God in so many areas that apply to the state but if I'm called to court to swear an oath of testimony I must put my hand on the Bible? Why are Bibles not allowed in schools but they are in prison? We've managed to come 228 years now without the church controlling this country's government. I think it works fine as it is.
Do you think that a governing body mentioning God infringes on the separation of church and state?

Reading about the Revolution really shows the founding fathers had no problems with mentioning God in government. Only Jefferson (I think) seemed to want to expel any mention of religion with the new American government. I believe the whole idea of separation of church and state was more along the lines for keeping governments from forcing a religion on its citizens. Having "in God we trust" on legal tender, saying "under God" or having the 10 Commandments on the outside of a court house does not force anyone to conform to any one religion.
--
Boots
January 15th, 2005  
Charge 7
 
 
I'm with you Doody on what was the Founding Fathers' intent. And as I pointed out already, 228 years seems like proof enough that things work as they are.
January 16th, 2005  
03USMC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charge_7
Didn't know that 03USMC. Knowing your background, I'm sure you're right on top of that he he. Thanks for the info. What do you think btw? Affirming seems less demanding than swearing on the flag or your particular religious book to me. Taking it all away seems to be a loosening of it all in my opinion.
I don't agree with it. I also think it loosens it up. But thats what the Courts have ruled so thats what we do. Swear or Affirm you lie you still get nailed with Perjury .

I had to swear in a Catholic Bishop (as a character witness) once and was instructed by the Judge to leave out the Swear or Affrim part. As he had taken an oath during his Ordination. Didn't understand the logic but apparently his Honor did.
January 16th, 2005  
CavScout
 
I love how everyone avoided my comment .....which makes sense, you can't reliably argue a position of faith in a logical sense, regardless of which side your on...
January 16th, 2005  
Duty Honor Country
 
 
if you would explain your position, I will comment.

I rarely comment on statements that could be offensive and are not explained rationally.
January 16th, 2005  
Missileer
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 03USMC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charge_7
Didn't know that 03USMC. Knowing your background, I'm sure you're right on top of that he he. Thanks for the info. What do you think btw? Affirming seems less demanding than swearing on the flag or your particular religious book to me. Taking it all away seems to be a loosening of it all in my opinion.
I don't agree with it. I also think it loosens it up. But thats what the Courts have ruled so thats what we do. Swear or Affirm you lie you still get nailed with Perjury .

I had to swear in a Catholic Bishop (as a character witness) once and was instructed by the Judge to leave out the Swear or Affrim part. As he had taken an oath during his Ordination. Didn't understand the logic but apparently his Honor did.
Most Christian denominations do not believe in swearing an oath in God's name. I don't see anything wrong with agreeing to tell the truth before God and man. Someone in another post mentioned an atheist having to swear in God's name might nullify the oath. It's about like calling a Judge "the right honorable" if you know he's not, I don't want to be the first to mention that to Hizzoner.
January 21st, 2005  
Strongbow
 
 
On the contrary, I think religion in the US is doing very well. The Baptists and Evangelical Christians are getting stronger economically and politically as time rolls on. Some of the US Christian groups are making oodles of cash in South America.

Don't worry about religion in the US. Business couldn't be better!

They have even got George Dubya in their pockets!
January 21st, 2005  
03USMC
 
 
Nice Rhetoric. Too bad many of us don't see our religion as a business. The generalization might work better if applied to something that is not so personal.